From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Terrell

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
Sep 20, 2024
No. 0748-2023 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Sep. 20, 2024)

Opinion

0748-2023

09-20-2024

IN THE MATTER OF DIANE TERRELL


UNREPORTED [*]

Circuit Court for Prince George's County Case No. CAE22-25211

Graeff, Zic, Wilner, Alan M., (Senior Judge, Specially Assigned), JJ.

OPINION

ZIC, J.

Appellant, William Bailey, Sr., claimed to have power of attorney and be a health care agent for appellee Diane Terrell. Ms. Terrell had been declining in health for close to a decade, resulting in appellee Jamia Happer filing a petition for guardianship of alleged disabled person with the Circuit Court for Prince George's County. The parties did not contest whether Ms. Terrell qualified as a disabled person under the Estates and Trusts Article of the Maryland Annotated Code, but Mr. Bailey asserted that he was a less restrictive form of intervention to appointing a guardian. The circuit court found Mr. Bailey did not have power of attorney, was not a health care agent, and no longer had title of his and Ms. Terrell's bank accounts because he did not act consistently with Ms. Terrell's interests. The court appointed Ms. Happer to be guardian of the person. Mr. Bailey filed this timely appeal. During the pendency of this appeal, Ms. Happer advised this Court that Ms. Terrell had passed away.

DISCUSSION "A case is moot when there is no longer an existing controversy between the parties at the time that the case is before the court, or when the court can no longer fashion an effective remedy." Cottman v. State, 395 Md. 729, 744 (2006) (quoting In re Kaela C., 394 Md. 432, 452 (2006)). "Generally, a moot case is dismissed without our deciding the merits of the controversy." Coburn v. Coburn, 342 Md. 244, 250 (1996); Hammen v. Baltimore County Police Department, 373 Md. 440, 450 (2003) ("[W]e generally dismiss moot actions without a decision on the merits.").

Here, Mr. Bailey argues that the circuit court erred by refusing to allow his counsel the right to advocate for his client "on the issue of who should be appointed as guardian of the person" and "by passing over [Mr.] Bailey, Sr.'s statutory priority for appointment as guardian of the person[.]" Ms. Terrell's death moots these issues as this Court can no longer fashion an effective remedy. See In re Riddlemoser, 317 Md. 496, 502 (1989) ("[A]ppeal is moot in view of [the ward's] death[.]"). The appeal is moot and dismissed without a decision on the merits.

APPEAL DISMISSED AS MOOT. COSTS TO BE PAID BY APPELLANT.

[*] This is an unreported opinion. This opinion may not be cited as precedent within the rule of stare decisis. It may be cited for its persuasive value only if the citation conforms to Maryland Rule 1-104(a)(2)(B).


Summaries of

In re Terrell

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
Sep 20, 2024
No. 0748-2023 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Sep. 20, 2024)
Case details for

In re Terrell

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF DIANE TERRELL

Court:Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Date published: Sep 20, 2024

Citations

No. 0748-2023 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Sep. 20, 2024)